The Ashes 2013: Simon Taufel defends DRS claiming technology will never be 100 per cent perfect

By Emily Benammar and wiresUpdated
Thu 25 Jul 2013, 10:32 AM AEST

Photo

Phil Hughes, Michael Clarke, Ed Cowan, Brad Haddin and Ashton Agar appeal unsuccessfully for the wicket of Stuart Broad of England during day three of the first Test.

Laurence Griffiths, Getty Images

Former Test umpire Simon Taufel has backed the use of the decision review system (DRS) at the centre of several Ashes controversies, saying technology will never be 100 per cent perfect.

Delivering the 13th MCC Spirit of Cricket Cowdrey Lecture at Lord's, the Australian, who retired last year, was coy over what changes, if any, could be made to improve the actual system, suggesting instead that the focus should be on players' use of it.

England leads the Ashes 2-0 but the first two Tests have featured controversial incidents regarding the use of the DRS.

On day two of the first Test, England was left incensed when Jonathan Trott was wrongly given out lbw before his team-mate Stuart Broad refused to walk after edging the ball to slip on day three - an incident Australia was unable to review having already used all referrals.

No matter what system of technology review/referral we implement in our game, it will not be perfect or 100 per cent. There are trade-offs and compromises with every system adopted.

Simon Taufel

The visitors' inept use of the system continued in the second Test with Shane Watson wasting a review on a plumb lbw decision and Chris Rogers failing to review a Graeme Swann lbw call off a full-toss that replays showed would have missed leg stump.

While the likes of former Australia captain Ian Chappell have said DRS should be solely in the hands of the umpires, Taufel lent his support to the under fire system.

"The technology genie has been let out of the bottle and it's not going to go back in," he said.

"I would simply advocate that we look at ways to be as pragmatic as possible so we can get more correct decisions and deliver more justice.

"I do have an important message on this topic though as it is often asked, 'what is your view on the DRS?' I'm not sure that this is the right question.

"Perhaps we should be asking 'are we using technology in the best way to serve the players, supporters, umpires and values of our game?'

"No matter what system of technology review/referral we implement in our game, it will not be perfect or 100 per cent.

"There are trade-offs and compromises with every system adopted.

"Today, everyone umpires the game by watching television. The invasive nature of this broadcasting has a double edge to it - it does put more pressure on players and umpires.

"Not too much now happens on a cricket field that is not captured by a camera, a microphone or piece of technology. This has the ability to bring out the best in the game and also the worst."

ICC needs to focus on umpire succession

Taufel also said that the ongoing Ashes series highlights another significant challenge for the International Cricket Council - that of succession planning.

England and Australia between them provide eight members of the ICCs 12-strong panel of elite umpires.

That means only four men - Pakistan's Aleem Dar, Sri Lanka's Kumar Dharmasena, South Africa's Marais Erasmus and New Zealand's Tony Hill - are currently eligible to officiate in the Ashes, with the current five-match series set to be followed by another five Tests in Australia starting later this year.

"The neutrality guidelines mean that eight of the 12 elite panel umpires are not eligible to officiate (in the Ashes)," Taufel said.

"We have a real need to encourage and support the other Test-playing countries to invest more resources in this area. This representation trend by two countries needs more competition from the others.

"Umpiring is everyone's business, everyone seems to have an opinion on it but we need to alter the mindset and have all the countries investing more in the future of match officiating."